AMRIK SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order dtd. 1/4/2011 passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in Criminal Appeal No.645 of 2004 and Criminal Appeal No.563 of 2004 by which the Division Bench of the High Court has dismissed the said appeals preferred by the accused and has confirmed the conviction and sentence passed by the learned Trial Court convicting the accused Amrik Singh and Subhash Chander for the offences punishable under Sec. 302 read with Sec. 34 and Sec. 392 of the IPC, the accused Amrik Singh and Subhash Chander have preferred the present appeals.

(2.) That the appellant herein was charged along with one Subhash Chander and Pritpal Singh for committing robbery and murdering one Gian Chand (deceased) during the course of the robbery. As per the prosecution case, the deceased Gian Chand, one Munshi Ram, father of the deceased along with the complainant Des Raj (PW1) were proceeding from the office of Sub-registrar District Fazilka and after dropping of the father of the deceased at the local bus stand, they proceeded towards their village. It was further alleged that on route to their village, three persons came on a scooter and tried stopping them. When the complainant who was driving the scooter did not stop, co-accused Subhash Chander thrown red chilli powder into the eyes of the complainant after which the scooter stopped and the complainant was temporarily blinded. That all the three tried to snatch the scooter of the complainant and in the said scuffle, present appellant - accused - Amrik Singh shot the deceased Gian Chand in the chest. The complainant arrived into the fields and upon his return he saw that the assailants have taken away the scooter and Gian Chand was lying unconscious with blood oozing out of his chest. As per the case of the prosecution the motive was that the father of the deceased had executed a sale deed in favour of sons of the complainant (PW1) for the purpose of which they had gone to the office of the Sub-registrar. The consideration for the sale had not been paid and an amount of Rs.5.00 lakhs was in the dicky of the scooter, which the assailants had stolen. That thereafter PW1 proceeded to the police station. His statement was recorded by PW11 Inspector Karamjit Singh who proceeded to the scene of occurrence and found the dead body of Gian Chand lying over there. He prepared inquest report. He collected the necessary evidence. PW6 Dr. M.M. Singh conducted post mortem examination on the dead body of Gian Chand. Post mortem was conducted on 8/5/2001 at about 6.30 p.m. As per the medical evidence death could have occurred about 6 hours prior to the examination. In course of the investigation Subhash Chander and Amrik Singh - accused were arrested on the basis of the disclosure statement of the appellant accused - Amrik Singh. ASI - PW7 recovered a sum of Rs.1.00 lakh alleged to have been looted out of Rs.5.00 lakhs which according to the complainant PW1 was kept in the dicky of the scooter. On the basis of the disclosure statement of the co-accused Subhash Chander a further sum of Rs.1.00 lakh was recovered. After completion of the investigation, the IO filed the charge-sheet. As the case was exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, the case was committed to the Sessions Court. The accused pleaded not guilty and therefore they came to be tried by the Sessions Court for the offence punishable under Ss. 302/34 and 392 read with Sec. 397 IPC.

(3.) Ms. Roohina Dua, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the accused has vehemently submitted that in the facts and circumstances of the case and on the evidence on record both, the learned Trial Court as well as the High Court have committed serious error in convicting the accused for the offence punishable under Sec. 302 read with Sec. 34 and Sec. 392 IPC respectively.